Lsquared wrote: MurderfaceMMA wrote:
Overpaid? Teachers do not make nearly enough money. So its okay for CEO's of corporations to make millions of dollars a year but you think that teachers making what? 35-45k a year is being paid very well? Wow you have it all mixed up. Teachers have a huge responsibility to teach young people the foundations that will lead them for the rest of their lives. Teachers are severely underpaid, their retirement is crap and insurance is horrible.
Corporate CEOs are highly educated and brilliant at making money, which is why they are paid so much. Teachers dont make money, therefore companies arent going to pay them millions of dollars. Teachers are also paid by the tax payers, while privately owned businesses are the ones paying the CEOs salary, so that is not a good comparison at all.
If a company thinks paying one man a fuck load of money is a good idea, why should anyone stop them? They made the money, and they are free to blow it on lollipops for all i care. The free market has a way of weeding out companies that make bad business moves, and if paying CEOs large sums of money isnt a good investment, there will be consequences. Why not let the market decide?
For the record, 35-45K isnt a bad salary, especially when you consider how much time off they have year round. Its a pretty good gig really.
meh i could rattle off dozens of ceos that were incompetent and failed but were still awarded giant sums of money and golden parachutes beyond ones imagination...
its systemic and at this point the disparity in pay between top level execs/upper management/ and everyone else is so obscene, its almost insulting to the individual, except for the overpaid, inept, derelict, chief executive.
And if only, these banks were acting entirely "free" of any government help. The truth is, too big to fail banks, like JP Morgan Chase, are basically out there taking massive and risky positions in capital markets allowing them to make tonnes of money (to pay their CEOs) but also losing tonnes of money too, as we saw with JP Morgan.
And they can take these massive risky positions, because they are fucking around with their depositors' money, which are federally insured. That is, the money that average joes and janes deposited in Chase Manhattan Bank (a retail / commercial lending bank that is now merged with JP Morgan) is backed up by federal taxpayers if JP Morgan Chase lose so much money they can't back up those deposits.
In other words, these investment banks make a tonnes of money playing around by someone else's money, which is backed up and insured by taxpayers.
This is the furthest thing from the "free market".
A strong version of the Volcker Rule-- if it ever gets passed and is not gutted by lobbyists and regulator-- would prevent investment banks from investing federally insured funds. Even better, is updated version of Glass Steagall Act (passed during the Great Depression but repealed in 2000) which prevented mergers between investment banks like JP Morgan and traditional commercial banks like Chase ManHattan-- avoiding bailouts and too big to fail.